Senate European ultranationalists!

Vivec are you really lecturing someone who, went I said I was most sympathetic to Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie said he was a Partij van de Arbeid supporter, on how he doesn't care about the effect of economic policy on the vulnerable in society?

Pls, this memetastic "I'm a soshulist" stuff has to stop. It is leading to ridiculous conclusions. And the Socialists in France have contributed to all sorts of woeful outcomes (the national past-time is striking for like... no reason) so they're hardly the most cheerable party out there. Arguably they have lead to the rise of support for Le Pen and Front National.

Firstly, Ghost, the poll responses were based on people who elected to respond and therefore carry in them an inherent bias. The Pew Survey quoted therein also notes as follows:

"These results chime with other surveys exploring attitudes to Islam in Europe. In a Pew survey of 10 European countries in 2016, majorities of the public had an unfavorable view of Muslims living in their country in five countries: Hungary (72%), Italy (69%), Poland (66%), Greece (65%), and Spain (50%), although those numbers were lower in the UK (28%), Germany (29%) and France (29%). There was also a widespread perception in many countries that the arrival of refugees would increase the likelihood of terrorism, with a median of 59% across ten European countries holding this view. This mirrors some attitudes in the US. "

So according to a real poll, 28% UK unfavourable vs ~48% on an internet based submission poll; 29% France via real poll vs ~62% in a uncontrolled internet poll, and 29% Germany in the real poll vs ~53% on the Ghost poll.

Vivec are you really lecturing someone who, went I said I was most sympathetic to Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie said he was a Partij van de Arbeid supporter, on how he doesn't care about the effect of economic policy on the vulnerable in society?

Pls, this memetastic "I'm a soshulist" stuff has to stop. It is leading to ridiculous conclusions. And the Socialists in France have contributed to all sorts of woeful outcomes (the national past-time is striking for like... no reason) so they're hardly the most cheerable party out there. Arguably they have lead to the rise of support for Le Pen and Front National.

Click to expand...

I guess you ignored the post where I said the French Socialists were the second worst socialist party in my opinion.

He's a boring moderate whose entire campaign is about not doing anything. That's what moderates are, people who do nothing but fill the chair they're sitting in. They should not be encouraged to run for anything imo.

Macon is the typical European centre left politician - smile at the camera and give meaningless statements.

Click to expand...

If Europeans dislike the stance the center-left has taken, why don't they just form slightly-more-left-wing parties, see which of them gets the more votes, and then hash things out afterwards? Because unlike America, they're not locked into a two-party system. That's better than running off to UKIP, FN, or AfD...

If Europeans dislike the stance the center-left has taken, why don't they just form slightly-more-left-wing parties, see which of them gets the more votes, and then hash things out afterwards? Because unlike America, they're not locked into a two-party system. That's better than running off to UKIP, FN, or AfD...

Click to expand...

The European Left is fractured and in decline, hence why social democracy is dying in Europe. Too many splits, disagreements and unable to answer globalization*. The financial crash hurt the Left a lot - many of the mainstream socialists embraced free markets as a means to spread social justice. Until the Left has a public debate about immigration and welfare it will always, sadly, struggle with the emerging Right.

*the populist Left crumbled pretty quickly in Spain and Greece. Divided between radicals and moderates.

London overwhelming voted to remain - so centre-left parties are focusing on London; yet forgetting traditional working class heartlands all voted to leave. Liberals are not even interested in the 52% who voted to leave; to them, they're a bunch of uneducated racists who hate immigrants.

As for the governing centre-right party - 15 point lead in the polls and Theresa May is trusted on every issue possible. "Don't Know" is her closet rival to best suited to be Prime Minister.

If a General Election was tomorrow, then the Tories will probably get a historic landslide.

The European Left is fractured and in decline, hence why social democracy is dying in Europe. Too many splits, disagreements and unable to answer globalization*. The financial crash hurt the Left a lot - many of the mainstream socialists embraced free markets as a means to spread social justice. Until the Left has a public debate about immigration and welfare it will always, sadly, struggle with the emerging Right.

*the populist Left crumbled pretty quickly in Spain and Greece. Divided between radicals and moderates.

Click to expand...

Well that's why I said the populist left should go form its own party. Voters will have the choice between the two, and whichever gets the more votes will have the greater say in a governing coalition...and then the debate is settled, right?

The left will continue to flounder so long as it is captive to the race politics war. Pitting white working class v other poor/disenfranchised is a great strategy from the right and has neutralised the left. As soon as they start pushing and pushing hard for approaches to poverty and enfranchisement that speak to all working class people, they will be relevant and viable again.

Because right now the left is willing to put anything ahead of the idea that its core constituency should include the white working class. It may not be conscious of it but the evidence is that this is the overwhelming message being sent and received.

Poverty is colourblind; structural bias ensures that there's a higher concentration of minorities in poverty but when you're poor, I doubt there's much comfort in knowing that on average, there are much poorer people of colour out there. And any programme that aims to lift the standards of living for the poorest X% in Europe will benefit, long term, minorities as much than if not more than whites because a lot of the stereotypes and bias have the wind stripped out of their bigoted sails.

Lenin noted with some dismay that Marx was proven wrong by WWI. Workers killed workers. And so long as you can divide the poor on lines of battle that have no business existing, you can ensure there's no force for the disadvantaged. I am not left wing, and I disagree with most of their prescriptions because there's too much emotion guiding their decision making process. They abhor research and objective facts when it might be detrimental to their emotive charge. But I am dismayed by the right more, and feel without the left to balance them we'll end up in a period of prolonged conflict and strife. This is not desirable.

And any programme that aims to lift the standards of living for the poorest X% in Europe will benefit, long term, minorities as much than if not more than whites because a lot of the stereotypes and bias have the wind stripped out of their bigoted sails.

Yes but the US has the problem of wanting to believe it's full of Decent and Good people, and therefore the priority seems to be enacting nothing that might end racial inequality but will work well on white guilt. If you could magically, and for a week, put white guilt to one side you could probably go nuts from a policy perspective. Actual change! Terrifying.

Yes but the US has the problem of wanting to believe it's full of Decent and Good people, and therefore the priority seems to be enacting nothing that might end racial inequality but will work well on white guilt. If you could magically, and for a week, put white guilt to one side you could probably go nuts from a policy perspective. Actual change! Terrifying.

Click to expand...

Maybe you're misunderstanding -- but generic policies put in place in the past have been demonstrably ineffective with minorities, and helping only white folks, like the New Deal did to help with the Great Depression. And, in fact, caused much of the racial class divide and generational wealth issues we have now.

Welfare / SNAP, for example, is also a generic policy -- and the plurality are white people -- and yet all of the fraud cases and "edge outliers" are generally described in coded racial terms. White folks would be perfectly fine with a welfare system that didn't benefit minorities, one presumes.

Because right now the left is willing to put anything ahead of the idea that its core constituency should include the white working class. It may not be conscious of it but the evidence is that this is the overwhelming message being sent and received.

Poverty is colourblind; structural bias ensures that there's a higher concentration of minorities in poverty but when you're poor, I doubt there's much comfort in knowing that on average, there are much poorer people of colour out there. And any programme that aims to lift the standards of living for the poorest X% in Europe will benefit, long term, minorities as much than if not more than whites because a lot of the stereotypes and bias have the wind stripped out of their bigoted sails.

Click to expand...

What do you mean the left excludes the white working class? As far as I can tell, they at least attempt to be colorblind in in trying to combat poverty. It's the right that goes "Hey, they're helping brown people at the expense of white people. They're race traitors!" Is it the left's fault that the right is putting out this cynical message and that it happens to be effective?